On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:03:32 +0000, Darius wrote:

> After trying to install a small application, I failed to notice that
> it was also uninstalling stuff from the system (idiotic dependencies)
> - had _nothing_ to do with using cooker. I managed to stop the
> removals after a few files removed, so damage limited. However, it
> managed to break / delete the use of RPM and URPMI.

Hahaha! HAR! Yet another reason to NOT use an RPM-based distro.

It's called dependency-hell.

--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

On 2008-02-29, Darius wrote:
> System: Mandriva 2008.1 (Cooker), x86_64
>
> After trying to install a small application, I failed to notice that
> it was also uninstalling stuff from the system (idiotic dependencies)
> - had _nothing_ to do with using cooker. I managed to stop the
> removals after a few files removed, so damage limited. However, it
> managed to break / delete the use of RPM and URPMI.

[...]

> Any suggestions on how to fix this. There are one or two _small_
> things broken, but most the system is actually running fine.
> Re-installing the entire OS is the least favourite option, considering
> how much of the system it will break.
>
> Darius

Does the installation disc have a 'repair' or 'upgrade' option? I think
either of those should reinstall the missing files for you.

Then check that you haven't set up any software 'sources' that aren't
specifically for your 64-bit 'cooker' system.

The whole point of a 'cooker' system is to pass lots of time finding and
mending problems, isn't it? Use an official release if you want it to do
anything reliably.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

Dan C writes:

> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 13:03:32 +0000, Darius wrote:
>
>> After trying to install a small application, I failed to notice that
>> it was also uninstalling stuff from the system (idiotic dependencies)
>> - had _nothing_ to do with using cooker. I managed to stop the
>> removals after a few files removed, so damage limited. However, it
>> managed to break / delete the use of RPM and URPMI.
>
> Hahaha! HAR! Yet another reason to NOT use an RPM-based distro.
>
> It's called dependency-hell.

Actually not.

It's a URPMI based distro and it understands the relationship
between RPMs just as well as a DEB based distro.

The OP started an install and stopped it with control-c.
For all we know, after it removed what it needed to it
might have proceeded to install what it needed and there
would have been no problem.

Darius wrote:

> System: Mandriva 2008.1 (Cooker), x86_64
>
> After trying to install a small application, I failed to notice that
> it was also uninstalling stuff from the system (idiotic dependencies)

I'm intrigued to know exactly what you were trying to install to make urpmi
uninstall itself?

> - had _nothing_ to do with using cooker. I managed to stop the
> removals after a few files removed, so damage limited. However, it
> managed to break / delete the use of RPM and URPMI.

That's because you uninstalled rpm/urpmi

> Now when I try to install an application (the ones below) I get the
> following error:
>
> "rpm: error while loading shared libraries: librpm-4.4.so: cannot open
> shared object file: No such file or directory"

see above

> I copied over some of these files to a memory card using Knoppix
> (won't allow me to write to any Linux partition) using the files from
> the Mandriva install DVD, but they can't install when back in Mandriva
> - the error above occurs.

see above

> Any suggestions on how to fix this.

The quickest way would be to re-install the os. The next quickest would be
an upgrade-install. Or you can unpack the relative rpms from your dvd, find
the correct places to put the particular files within the rpm and copy them
there. I know which I'd be doing.

> There are one or two _small_
> things broken, but most the system is actually running fine.
> Re-installing the entire OS is the least favourite option, considering
> how much of the system it will break.

How will re-installing the os break your system exactly?

--
sid
RLU 300284
Mandriva 2008.1/cooker X86_64
2.6.24.2

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:37:48 +0000, Dan Espen wrote:

>>> removals after a few files removed, so damage limited. However, it
>>> managed to break / delete the use of RPM and URPMI.

>> Hahaha! HAR! Yet another reason to NOT use an RPM-based distro.
>> It's called dependency-hell.

> Actually not.
> It's a URPMI based distro and it understands the relationship
> between RPMs just as well as a DEB based distro.

It's an RPM based distro, as I said. URPMI is just a shiny front end for
RPM, added by Mandriva. What do the URPMI database/repositories contain?
That's right.... RPM files.

> The OP started an install and stopped it with control-c.
> For all we know, after it removed what it needed to it
> might have proceeded to install what it needed and there
> would have been no problem.

That part may very well be true.


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Dan C writes:

> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:37:48 +0000, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>>>> removals after a few files removed, so damage limited. However, it
>>>> managed to break / delete the use of RPM and URPMI.
>
>>> Hahaha! HAR! Yet another reason to NOT use an RPM-based distro.
>>> It's called dependency-hell.
>
>> Actually not.
>> It's a URPMI based distro and it understands the relationship
>> between RPMs just as well as a DEB based distro.
>
> It's an RPM based distro, as I said. URPMI is just a shiny front end for
> RPM, added by Mandriva. What do the URPMI database/repositories contain?
> That's right.... RPM files.

Don't be dumb.

Dependency hell is when you go to install something and
it tells you you need to install something else.
You install that and you
find out you need still more.

That does not occur with URPMI.
You ask to install a package and it figures out
everything you need and installs it all.

I don't think it's any different than deb or whatever you
think is better.

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 20:38:29 +0000, Dan Espen wrote:

>>>> Hahaha! HAR! Yet another reason to NOT use an RPM-based distro.
>>>> It's called dependency-hell.

>>> Actually not.
>>> It's a URPMI based distro and it understands the relationship between
>>> RPMs just as well as a DEB based distro.

>> It's an RPM based distro, as I said. URPMI is just a shiny front end
>> for RPM, added by Mandriva. What do the URPMI database/repositories
>> contain? That's right.... RPM files.

> Don't be dumb.
> Dependency hell is when you go to install something and it tells you you
> need to install something else. You install that and you find out you
> need still more.

Oh, I get it. Now we're switching subjects so you don't appear to be
wrong. OK, so what I originally said about "dependency hell" wasn't
really what happened to the OP. OK. However, the fact remains that
Mandriva is an *RPM-based* distro, not an *URPMI-based* distro, as I keep
saying.

> That does not occur with URPMI.
> You ask to install a package and it figures out everything you need and
> installs it all.

Yes, I know.

> I don't think it's any different than deb or whatever you think is
> better.

Trust me, it's a *LOT* different than what I think is better. See sig.
Free clue: It's not Ubuntu.


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

Dan C writes:

> On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 20:38:29 +0000, Dan Espen wrote:
>
>>>>> Hahaha! HAR! Yet another reason to NOT use an RPM-based distro.
>>>>> It's called dependency-hell.
>
>>>> Actually not.
>>>> It's a URPMI based distro and it understands the relationship between
>>>> RPMs just as well as a DEB based distro.
>
>>> It's an RPM based distro, as I said. URPMI is just a shiny front end
>>> for RPM, added by Mandriva. What do the URPMI database/repositories
>>> contain? That's right.... RPM files.
>
>> Don't be dumb.
>> Dependency hell is when you go to install something and it tells you you
>> need to install something else. You install that and you find out you
>> need still more.
>
> Oh, I get it. Now we're switching subjects so you don't appear to be
> wrong. OK, so what I originally said about "dependency hell" wasn't
> really what happened to the OP. OK. However, the fact remains that
> Mandriva is an *RPM-based* distro, not an *URPMI-based* distro, as I keep
> saying.

I didn't change the subject.

Just admit that URPMI doesn't have anything called "dependency hell"
and we'll be in agreement.

As far as I am concerned, that IS the subject.
It's what you said, and that's what I meant when I said "Actually not".

>> That does not occur with URPMI.
>> You ask to install a package and it figures out everything you need and
>> installs it all.
>
> Yes, I know.

You know that there is no dependency hell?
Then why don't you say you were wrong?

>> I don't think it's any different than deb or whatever you think is
>> better.
>
> Trust me, it's a *LOT* different than what I think is better. See sig.
> Free clue: It's not Ubuntu.
> "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

So Slackware is good because it's hard?

So I went here:

http://www.slackware.com/config/packages.php

and I see a tgz based system.
That's good?
Why?

On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 04:31:23 +0000, Dan Espen wrote:

>>>>>> Hahaha! HAR! Yet another reason to NOT use an RPM-based distro.
>>>>>> It's called dependency-hell.

>>>>> Actually not.
>>>>> It's a URPMI based distro and it understands the relationship between
>>>>> RPMs just as well as a DEB based distro.

>>>> It's an RPM based distro, as I said. URPMI is just a shiny front end
>>>> for RPM, added by Mandriva. What do the URPMI database/repositories
>>>> contain? That's right.... RPM files.

>>> Don't be dumb.
>>> Dependency hell is when you go to install something and it tells you you
>>> need to install something else. You install that and you find out you
>>> need still more.

>> Oh, I get it. Now we're switching subjects so you don't appear to be
>> wrong. OK, so what I originally said about "dependency hell" wasn't
>> really what happened to the OP. OK. However, the fact remains that
>> Mandriva is an *RPM-based* distro, not an *URPMI-based* distro, as I keep
>> saying.

> I didn't change the subject.
> Just admit that URPMI doesn't have anything called "dependency hell"
> and we'll be in agreement.

Damn, you have reading comprehension issues. OK. Look right there above
where I did that. The sentence that says: "OK, so what I originally
said...". See it?

> As far as I am concerned, that IS the subject. It's what you said, and
> that's what I meant when I said "Actually not".

No. You said Mandriva was an "URPMI-based" distro. It isn't.

>>> That does not occur with URPMI.
>>> You ask to install a package and it figures out everything you need
>>> and installs it all.

>> Yes, I know.

> You know that there is no dependency hell? Then why don't you say you
> were wrong?

No. I know how URPMI works. That's what I just said.

>>> I don't think it's any different than deb or whatever you think is
>>> better.

>> Trust me, it's a *LOT* different than what I think is better. See sig.
>> Free clue: It's not Ubuntu.
>> "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

> So Slackware is good because it's hard?

No, it's better for other reasons. It's not hard, at least for those with
a 3-digit IQ.

> So I went here:
> http://www.slackware.com/config/packages.php
>
> and I see a tgz based system.
> That's good?

Yes.

> Why?

Many reasons. One of them is that only things which you specifically
desire to be installed will be installed. Another is that you get clean,
original packages, not stuff which has been "improved" by the distro's
choice of patches and changes. There are quite a few more, but you
probably don't care too much about them, so I won't bore you.


--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:26:00 +0000, Whiskers scribed:

Firstly I'd like to thank everyone for their comments, the helpful and
not helpful one.

> Does the installation disc have a 'repair' or 'upgrade' option? I think
> either of those should reinstall the missing files for you.

I tried this, but for whatever reason, it could not get the file I
needed to install, so I re-installed Linux, which of course cured the
problem. Only had to re-download all of cooker again (without
problems).

To others comments, I know what cooker is, and was installed to test
so _others_ don't have problems. However, this original problem was
NOT caused because I was using cooker, the application was in the
normal development tree.